Total Posts:17|Showing Posts:1-17
Jump to topic:

Civil War, over slavery, ha!

Pigney
Posts: 31
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/6/2016 12:35:53 AM
Posted: 6 months ago
I have heard people say the civil war was over states rights, others say it was over the right to back money with gold, but perhaps the most preposterous is that idea that the civil war was about slavery.
Hiu
Posts: 1,609
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/7/2016 2:03:27 AM
Posted: 6 months ago
At 11/6/2016 12:35:53 AM, Pigney wrote:
I have heard people say the civil war was over states rights, others say it was over the right to back money with gold, but perhaps the most preposterous is that idea that the civil war was about slavery.

"In the spring of 1861, decades of simmering tensions between the northern and southern United States over issues including states' rights versus federal authority, westward expansion and slavery exploded into the American Civil War (1861-65)."

It continues...

" Growing abolitionist sentiment in the North after the 1830s and northern opposition to slavery"s extension into the new western territories led many southerners to fear that the existence of slavery in america"and thus the backbone of their economy"was in danger."

See:http://www.history.com...
Pigney
Posts: 31
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/7/2016 9:15:04 PM
Posted: 6 months ago
At 11/7/2016 2:03:27 AM, Hiu wrote:
At 11/6/2016 12:35:53 AM, Pigney wrote:
I have heard people say the civil war was over states rights, others say it was over the right to back money with gold, but perhaps the most preposterous is that idea that the civil war was about slavery.

"In the spring of 1861, decades of simmering tensions between the northern and southern United States over issues including states' rights versus federal authority, westward expansion and slavery exploded into the American Civil War (1861-65)."

It continues...

" Growing abolitionist sentiment in the North after the 1830s and northern opposition to slavery"s extension into the new western territories led many southerners to fear that the existence of slavery in america"and thus the backbone of their economy"was in danger."

See:http://www.history.com...

Yes, so it would seem, but consider this, the emancipation proclamation was the first mention of slavery in the war. It was issued half-way through the war. Now how could a war be over something that first appeared in the middle of the war. Granted the state rights were being infringed upon by abolitionists (i am not saying slavery was good, i am simply saying it was the right of the state to determine slave laws) but it was certainly not the right that sparked the civil war. The right to cede was probably the right most in question (given that the war started over a conflict that sprung up from the north failing to recognize the south's right to cede).
Peepette
Posts: 1,495
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/7/2016 10:37:06 PM
Posted: 6 months ago
At 11/7/2016 9:15:04 PM, Pigney wrote:
At 11/7/2016 2:03:27 AM, Hiu wrote:
At 11/6/2016 12:35:53 AM, Pigney wrote:
I have heard people say the civil war was over states rights, others say it was over the right to back money with gold, but perhaps the most preposterous is that idea that the civil war was about slavery.

"In the spring of 1861, decades of simmering tensions between the northern and southern United States over issues including states' rights versus federal authority, westward expansion and slavery exploded into the American Civil War (1861-65)."

It continues...

" Growing abolitionist sentiment in the North after the 1830s and northern opposition to slavery"s extension into the new western territories led many southerners to fear that the existence of slavery in america"and thus the backbone of their economy"was in danger."

See:http://www.history.com...

Yes, so it would seem, but consider this, the emancipation proclamation was the first mention of slavery in the war. It was issued half-way through the war. Now how could a war be over something that first appeared in the middle of the war. Granted the state rights were being infringed upon by abolitionists (i am not saying slavery was good, i am simply saying it was the right of the state to determine slave laws) but it was certainly not the right that sparked the civil war. The right to cede was probably the right most in question (given that the war started over a conflict that sprung up from the north failing to recognize the south's right to cede).

This is not the case. The subject of slavery was part of the Louisiana Purchase. Lincoln spoke on the topic on several occations prior to Emansipation Proclomation. From his view, a presidence had been set with the Louisiana Purchase abolishing slavery in federal lands, placing the subject under federal juristiction.
http://www.mrlincolnandfreedom.org...
http://www.civilwar.org...
Hiu
Posts: 1,609
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/8/2016 1:21:28 AM
Posted: 6 months ago
At 11/7/2016 9:15:04 PM, Pigney wrote:
At 11/7/2016 2:03:27 AM, Hiu wrote:
At 11/6/2016 12:35:53 AM, Pigney wrote:
I have heard people say the civil war was over states rights, others say it was over the right to back money with gold, but perhaps the most preposterous is that idea that the civil war was about slavery.

"In the spring of 1861, decades of simmering tensions between the northern and southern United States over issues including states' rights versus federal authority, westward expansion and slavery exploded into the American Civil War (1861-65)."

It continues...

" Growing abolitionist sentiment in the North after the 1830s and northern opposition to slavery"s extension into the new western territories led many southerners to fear that the existence of slavery in america"and thus the backbone of their economy"was in danger."

See:http://www.history.com...

Yes, so it would seem, but consider this, the emancipation proclamation was the first mention of slavery in the war. It was issued half-way through the war. Now how could a war be over something that first appeared in the middle of the war. Granted the state rights were being infringed upon by abolitionists (i am not saying slavery was good, i am simply saying it was the right of the state to determine slave laws) but it was certainly not the right that sparked the civil war. The right to cede was probably the right most in question (given that the war started over a conflict that sprung up from the north failing to recognize the south's right to cede).

I gave you an entire link and information to read yet it seems you are content with your own set of thoughts so is this a discussion or you basically telling me that although you've considered my information, you are comfortable with your own beliefs? Now unless you have something to counter what I've given you, your opinion amounts to anecdotes. I am willing to consider your evidence.
imabench
Posts: 21,751
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/8/2016 8:49:43 AM
Posted: 6 months ago
At 11/6/2016 12:35:53 AM, Pigney wrote:
I have heard people say the civil war was over states rights, others say it was over the right to back money with gold, but perhaps the most preposterous is that idea that the civil war was about slavery.

Several state organizations listed reasons for their secession from the Union, and many of those explicitly mentioned slavery as one of the reasons, which was voted on and ratified by State governments as official.

http://www.civilwar.org...

Congrats, youre retarded.
Latest person trolled to death by Imabench: http://www.debate.org...

7/14/16 = The Presidency Dies

DDO: THE MOVIE = http://www.debate.org...
http://www.debate.org...

VP of DDO from Dec 14th 2014 to Jan 1st 2015
Welfare-Worker
Posts: 1,694
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/16/2016 6:04:47 PM
Posted: 6 months ago
For over fifty years I have been told that the civil war was not about slavery, it was about 'states rights'.
For over fifty years I have been told that the civil war was about slavery. Not from the same sources obviously, but equally credible sources.

I have concluded that it was about the right of states to govern themselves, and the foremost issue at the time was slavery.

It's the economy.
For the wealthy, their wealth came from owning slaves.
For the people dying on the battlefields, I don't think it was about retaining their wealth, as they had none. For them, it seems to me, it was about sovereignty.

I don't think it was as easy as "the civil war was about slavery", and yet, if there were no slavery, I doubt there would have been a war.
Subutai
Posts: 3,910
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/20/2016 11:12:46 AM
Posted: 6 months ago
At 11/6/2016 12:35:53 AM, Pigney wrote:
I have heard people say the civil war was over states rights, others say it was over the right to back money with gold, but perhaps the most preposterous is that idea that the civil war was about slavery.

If you think that the civil war was about states rights, you're not wrong, but those states rights were about states rights regarding the institution of slavery. So you cant believe that one caused it without the other.
Capitalism will never fall on its own. It will have to be pushed. The accumulation of capital will never cease. It will have to be stopped. The capitalist class will never willingly surrender their power. It will have to be dispossessed. - David Harvey
Skepsikyma
Posts: 9,006
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/20/2016 6:15:52 PM
Posted: 6 months ago
At 11/6/2016 12:35:53 AM, Pigney wrote:
I have heard people say the civil war was over states rights, others say it was over the right to back money with gold, but perhaps the most preposterous is that idea that the civil war was about slavery.

Secession was about slavery. The war was about preserving the union as a single political entity.
"See now Oblivion shimmering all around us, its very tranquility deadlier than tempest. How little all our keels have troubled it."
- Lord Dunsany -

"Over her head the stars, the thoughts of God in the heavens,
Shone on the eyes of man, who had ceased to marvel and worship"
- Henry Longfellow -

"We enjoy, we see nothing by direct vision; but only by reflection, and in anatomical dismemberment."
- Thomas Carlyle -
ColeTrain
Posts: 4,693
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/21/2016 4:34:57 AM
Posted: 6 months ago
At 11/20/2016 6:15:52 PM, Skepsikyma wrote:
At 11/6/2016 12:35:53 AM, Pigney wrote:
I have heard people say the civil war was over states rights, others say it was over the right to back money with gold, but perhaps the most preposterous is that idea that the civil war was about slavery.

Secession was about slavery. The war was about preserving the union as a single political entity.

Indeed.
"The right to 360 noscope noobs shall not be infringed!!!" -- tajshar2k
"So, to start off, I've never committed suicide." -- Vaarka
"I eat glue." -- brontoraptor
"I mean, at this rate, I'd argue for a ham sandwich presidency." -- ResponsiblyIrresponsible
"Overthrow Assad, heil jihad." -- 16kadams when trolling in hangout
"Hillary Clinton is not my favorite person ... and her campaign is as inspiring as a bowl of cottage cheese." -- YYW
ColeTrain
Posts: 4,693
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/21/2016 4:35:27 AM
Posted: 6 months ago
At 11/20/2016 11:12:46 AM, Subutai wrote:
At 11/6/2016 12:35:53 AM, Pigney wrote:
I have heard people say the civil war was over states rights, others say it was over the right to back money with gold, but perhaps the most preposterous is that idea that the civil war was about slavery.

If you think that the civil war was about states rights, you're not wrong, but those states rights were about states rights regarding the institution of slavery. So you cant believe that one caused it without the other.

You're correct. I've heard the argument before, and it's deliriously circular. Lol.
"The right to 360 noscope noobs shall not be infringed!!!" -- tajshar2k
"So, to start off, I've never committed suicide." -- Vaarka
"I eat glue." -- brontoraptor
"I mean, at this rate, I'd argue for a ham sandwich presidency." -- ResponsiblyIrresponsible
"Overthrow Assad, heil jihad." -- 16kadams when trolling in hangout
"Hillary Clinton is not my favorite person ... and her campaign is as inspiring as a bowl of cottage cheese." -- YYW
Pigney
Posts: 31
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/21/2016 8:34:13 PM
Posted: 6 months ago
At 11/8/2016 8:49:43 AM, imabench wrote:
At 11/6/2016 12:35:53 AM, Pigney wrote:
I have heard people say the civil war was over states rights, others say it was over the right to back money with gold, but perhaps the most preposterous is that idea that the civil war was about slavery.

Several state organizations listed reasons for their secession from the Union, and many of those explicitly mentioned slavery as one of the reasons, which was voted on and ratified by State governments as official.

http://www.civilwar.org...

Congrats, youre retarded.

Thanks for the complement. I will not deny, the breaking away of the south was over slavery, but not the war. the war was the farthest thing from that. But, i cannot say i blame too many of you. There are not many places where people can find real accurate history. Shucks, most people don't even know what the REAL Confederate flag looked like. It wasn't the one people call the Confederate flag today.
GrimlyF
Posts: 876
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/24/2016 5:09:43 AM
Posted: 6 months ago
At 11/21/2016 8:34:13 PM, Pigney wrote:
At 11/8/2016 8:49:43 AM, imabench wrote:
At 11/6/2016 12:35:53 AM, Pigney wrote:
I have heard people say the civil war was over states rights, others say it was over the right to back money with gold, but perhaps the most preposterous is that idea that the civil war was about slavery.

Several state organizations listed reasons for their secession from the Union, and many of those explicitly mentioned slavery as one of the reasons, which was voted on and ratified by State governments as official.

http://www.civilwar.org...

Congrats, youre retarded.

Thanks for the complement. I will not deny, the breaking away of the south was over slavery, but not the war. the war was the farthest thing from that. But, i cannot say i blame too many of you. There are not many places where people can find real accurate history. Shucks, most people don't even know what the REAL Confederate flag looked like. It wasn't the one people call the Confederate flag today.

"Real accurate history".Perhaps a history buff such as yourself can tell me if the Confederacy were "freedom fighters" or "terrorists".I'm sure the Rebels thought of themselves as freedom fighters whilst the Union thought of them as terrorists but how does history categorise them?.............Quote; "Those who have served the cause of revolution have ploughed the sea". Simon Bolivar: 1783-1830.
HEALTH WARNING!. Contact with WYLTED can damage your brain.
ShabShoral is beneath notice.
Cammac
Posts: 3
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/13/2017 2:26:40 PM
Posted: 4 months ago
WE, the People of the [United States] Confederated States, each State acting in its sovereign and independent character, in order to form a [more perfect Union] permanent Federal government, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquillity [provide for the common defense, promote the general Welfare], and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, invoking the favor and guidance of Almighty God, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the [United] Confederate States of America.

ARTICLE I.

SECTION I.

All legislative Powers herein [granted] delegated, shall be vested in a Congress of the [United] Confederate States, which shall consist of a Senate and House of Representatives.

SECTION II.

The House of Representatives shall be composed of Members chosen every second Year by the People of the several States, and the Electors in each State shall be citizens of the Confederate States, and have the Qualifications requisite for Electors of the most numerous Branch of the State Legislature; but no person of foreign birth, and not a citizen of the Confederate States, shall be allowed to vote for any officer, civil or political, State or federal.

No Person shall be a Representative who shall not have attained to the Age of twenty-five Years, and [been seven Years a Citizen of the United] be a citizen of the Confederate States, and who shall not, when elected, be an Inhabitant of that State in which he shall be chosen.

Representatives and direct Taxes shall be apportioned among the several States which may be included within this [Union] Confederacy, according to their respective Numbers, which shall be determined by adding to the whole Number of free Persons, including those bound to Service for a Term of Years, and excluding Indians not taxed, three-fifths of all [other Persons] slaves. The actual Enumeration shall be made within three Years after the first Meeting of the Congress of the [United] Confederate States, and within every subsequent Term of ten Years, in such Manner as they shall by Law direct. The Number of Representatives shall not exceed one for every [thirty] fifty Thousand, but each State shall have at Least one Representative; and until such enumeration shall be made, the State of [New Hampshire shall be entitled to chuse three, Massachusetts eight, Rhode Island and Providence Plantations one, Connecticut five, New York six, New Jersey four, Pennsylvania eight, Delaware one, Maryland six, Virginia ten, North Carolina five, South Carolina five, and Georgia three] South Carolina shall be entitled to choose six, the State of Georgia ten, the State of Alabama nine, the State of Florida two, the State of Mississippi seven, the State of Louisiana six, and the State of Texas six.

When vacancies happen in the Representation from any State, the Executive Authority thereof shall issue Writs of Election to fill such Vacancies.

The House of Representatives shall chuse their Speaker and other Officers; and shall have the sole Power of Impeachment; except that any judicial or other federal officer resident and acting solely within the limits of any State, may be impeached by a vote of two-thirds of both branches of the Legislature thereof.

SECTION III.

The Senate of the [United] Confederate States shall be composed of two Senators from each State, chosen by the Legislature thereof, for six Years, at the regular session next immediately preceding the commencement of the term of service; and each Senator shall have one Vote.

Immediately after they shall be assembled in Consequence of the first Election, they shall be divided as equally as may be into three Classes. The Seats of the Senators of the first Class shall be vacated at the Expiration of the second Year, of the second Class at the Expiration of the fourth Year, and of the third Class at the Expiration of the sixth Year, so that one-third may be chosen every second Year; and if Vacancies happen by Resignation, or otherwise, during the Recess of the Legislature of any State, the Executive thereof may make temporary Appointments until the next Meeting of the Legislature, which shall then fill such Vacancies.

No Person shall be a Senator who shall not have attained to the Age of thirty Years, and [been nine Years a Citizen of the United] be a citizen of the Confederate States, and who shall not, when elected, be an Inhabitant of that State for which he shall be chosen.

The Vice President of the [United] Confederate States shall be President of the Senate, but shall have no Vote, unless they be equally divided.

The Senate shall chuse their other Officers, and also a President pro tempore, in the Absence of the Vice President, or when he shall exercise the Office of President of the United States.

The Senate shall have the sole Power to try all Impeachments. When sitting for that Purpose, they shall be on Oath or Affirmation. When the President of the [United] Confederate States is tried, the Chief Justice shall preside: And no Person shall be convicted without the Concurrence of two-thirds of the Members present.

Judgment in Cases of Impeachment shall not extend further than to removal from Office, and Disqualification to hold and enjoy any Office of honour, Trust or Profit under the [United] Confederate States; but the Party convicted shall nevertheless be liable and subject to Indictment, Trial, Judgment and Punishment, according to Law.

SECTION lV.

The Times, Places and Manner of holding Elections for Senators and Representatives, shall be prescribed in each State by the Legislature thereof, subject to the provisions of this Constitution; but the Congress may at any time by Law make or alter such Regulations, except as to the times and places of chusing Senators.

The Congress shall assemble at least once in every Year, and such Meeting shall be on the first Monday in December, unless they shall by Law appoint a different Day.

SECTION V.

Each House shall be the Judge of the Elections, Returns and Qualifications of its own Members, and a Majority of each shall constitute a Quorum to do Business; but a smaller Number may adjourn from day to day, and may be authorized to compel the Attendance of absent Members, in such Manner, and under such Penalties as each House may provide.

Each House may determine the Rules of its Proceedings, punish its Members for disorderly Behaviour, and, with the Concurrence of two-thirds of the whole number expel a Member.

Each House shall keep a Journal of its Proceedings, and from time to time publish the same, excepting such Parts as may in their Judgment require Secrecy; and the Yeas and Nays of the Members of either House on any question shall, at the Desire of one-fifth of those Present, be entered on the Journal

Neither House, during the Session of Congress, shall, without the Consent of the other, adjourn for more than three days, nor to any other Place than that in which the two Houses shall be sitting.

SECTION VI.

The Senators and Representatives shall receive a Compensation for their Services, to be ascertained by Law, and paid out of the Treasury of the [United] Confederate States. They shall in all Cases, except Treason [Felony] and Breach of the Peace, be privileged from Arrest during their Attendance at the Session of their respective Houses, and in going to and returning from the same; and for any Speech or Debate in either House, they shall not be questioned in any other Place.

you can read the hole constotution if you want i think the civil war was over state rights
Fernyx
Posts: 615
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/13/2017 7:25:35 PM
Posted: 4 months ago
It was over states rights, abolition was inevitable however expedited through the war. Lincoln saw slavery as a morally wrong issue, however even he did not think he had the authority to abolish slavery and only did so through the reasoning that slaves allowed whites to fight through taking care of their property. The chaos in the south and unity in the north that followed after the emancipation was a strategic decision by Lincoln to help the north win.
Scruggs
Posts: 474
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/15/2017 4:07:29 AM
Posted: 4 months ago
At 11/7/2016 2:03:27 AM, Hiu wrote:
Why use the History Channel when we can use primary sources?

"My enemies say I am now carrying on this war for the sole purpose of abolition. It is & will be carried on so long as I am President for the sole purpose of restoring the Union. But no human power can subdue this rebellion without using the Emancipation lever as I have done. Freedom has given us the control of 200,000 able bodied men, born & raised on southern soil. It will give us more yet. Just so much it has sub[t]racted from the strength of our enemies, & instead of alienating the south from us, there are evidences of a fraternal feeling growing up between our own & rebel soldiers. My enemies condemn my emancipation policy. Let them prove by the history of this war, that we can restore the Union without it."
Source: http://quod.lib.umich.edu...

These were the words of Abraham Lincoln himself. Do you not agree with him about his "sole purpose"?

"What now of the essential spirit of these young volunteers? Why did they volunteer? For what did they give their lives? We can never appreciate the story of their deeds as soldiers until we answer this question correctly.

Surely it was not for slavery they fought. The great majority of them had never owned a slave and had little or [50] no interest in the institution. My own father, for example, had freed his slaves long years before; that is, all save one, who would not be 'emancipated,' our dear 'Mammy,' who clung to us when we moved to the North and never recognized any change in her condition or her relations to us. The great conflict will never be properly comprehended by the man who looks upon it as a war for the preservation of slavery."
Source: http://www.perseus.tufts.edu...

Major Robert Stiles, who served under Robert E. Lee, did not believe that the purpose of the war was slavery. Nor did the Jefferson Davis himself:

"My first object in this work was to prove, by historical authority, that each of the states, as sovereign parties to the compact of Union, had the reserved power to secede from it whenever it should be found not to answer the ends for which it was established. If this has been done, it follows that the war was, on the part of the United States government, one of aggression and usurpation, and, on the part of the South, was for the defense of an inherent, unalienable right.

My next purpose was to show, by the gallantry and devotion of the Southern people, in their unequal struggle, how thorough was their conviction of the justice of their cause; that, by their humanity to the wounded and captives, they proved themselves the worthy descendants of chivalric sires, and fit to be free; and that, in every case, as when our army invaded Pennsylvania, by their respect for private rights, their morality and observance of the laws of civilized war, they are entitled to the confidence and regard of mankind.

The want of space has compelled me to omit a notice of many noble deeds, both of heroic men and women. The roll of honor, merely, would fill more than the pages allotted to this work. To others, who can say cuncta quorum vidi, I must leave the pleasant task of paying the tribute due to their associate patriots.

In asserting the right of secession, it has not been my wish to incite to its exercise. I recognize the fact that the war showed it to be impracticable, but this did not prove it to be wrong; now that it may not be again attempted, and that the Union may promote the general welfare, it is needful that the truth, the whole truth, should be known, so that crimination and recrimination may for ever cease, and then, on the basis of fraternity and faithful regard for the rights of the states, there may be written on the arch of the Union, Esto perpetua."
Source: http://www.perseus.tufts.edu...
"You contribute nothing to your salvation except the sin that made it necessary." - Jonathan Edwards
Unterseeboot
Posts: 202
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/19/2017 11:35:32 PM
Posted: 4 months ago
At 11/6/2016 12:35:53 AM, Pigney wrote:
I have heard people say the civil war was over states rights, others say it was over the right to back money with gold, but perhaps the most preposterous is that idea that the civil war was about slavery.

It WAS about Slavery, genius.

Oh...I suppose you're one of those new young guys who just read some revisionist history and so you think you're hip and cool and know the REAL story and that all those history text books we been reading all these years are wrong.

Yeah, it was trendy several years ago to say the Civil War was not about Slavery, but about States Rights. This is what the Confederacy always said. They liked to claim the War was to them, much like the Revolutionary War was for America. That it was as justified war of Independence against tyranny, like we fought to escape tyranny and oppression in England.

Truth is, that's all Lost Cause Southern BS. Truth is: the South, especially the big plantation owners, felt that when Lincoln was elected he would abolish slavery, which, after the invention of the cotton gin, would have drastically and unacceptably hurt production. READ: hurt their incomes. Their pocket books. So, just like most wars, the Civil War was instigated by the Rich, and they sent the poor to fight and die for them. There's your revisionist history, bro.

Sure, it's true that the Southern Plantation Owners felt that Slavery WAS a right of their States. But here's the deal, Camille: ALL of those other problems the South had regarding rights and taxation and whatnot, could have been worked out without resorting to segregation and War. All of them, that is, except for Slavery.

Ergo: like it or not, the Civil War was fought over slavery. At least it was fought over THAT particular issue far more and any other.

LOL....I bet you didn't count on a history grad busting you up in this argument, didja? That's OK. Don't worry. It happens. Just try and learn from this. And, if you still don't believe what I say, I will be glad to engage in a formal debate with you on this issue.

Let me know.